I am able to enter the state of presence through observing my thoughts and through remaining rooted in my inner body, and I love this state. It feels as if I have awakened into reality out of an unconscious slumber, and that this state is infused with a latent underlying euphoria- an aliveness.

The point is I get it. I get presence. And I want to be in this state more often.

What I do not understand is how many activities can operate under this state. For example -- reading a book, having a conversation, driving a car.

To me, these 3 activities -- reading a book, having a conversation, driving a car -- all seem to require the mind. They seem to require thought.

For instance, I do not get how the correct response in each moment arises out of presence in an activity such as driving. Tolle states that a response comes from being, and that there is infinitely more intelligence in being than in your mind. But I don't get how being would know the next response in the subsequent series of processes required to drive a car.

How do I drive with presence? How do I have a conversation with presence? How do I read with presence?

To me, presence seems to be an awareness. An awareness, and an appreciation of the moment. And I do not understand how any action would arise out of 100% awareness. Perhaps 100% awareness is not possible in these activities that I have mentioned. Perhaps a percentage of less than 100% is, for example 80% awareness, and that 100% awareness is only possible in a state of non-action, such as when meditating or lying in a bed. It seems to me that 100% awareness would lead to utter inaction, and if I were driving, I would veer off the road into a wreck.

I feel like I am stuck in a mental rut now, and it makes me sad because I enjoy this state so much. Maybe the answer is beyond words. I understand now that this is a possibility, but I would appreciate any exercise that could lead me to know the answer.

Let me know if I need to elaborate. If I do, I will try to think of a way to convey this problem further.

I am able to enter the state of presence through observing my thoughts and through remaining rooted in my inner body, and I love this state.

Thing is its not a state, it's you, awareness, which is your true nature, not the "apparent" person you appear to be. So, it's not a "state" of mind.

And I want to be in this state more often.

Right now you have not apprehended that this is you...the "real" you. So, you see it as an object that comes and goes to you, this "presence" thingy, but actually your always presence (I call it awareness).

However, your only recognizing it when the mind is calm and still. So, it "appears" as if awareness is coming and going, but awareness is the background, substratum of all that is, it pervades/illumines and enlivens the mind/body/sense complex (person). As well as being the substanceless substance that the "apparent" person and world, is composed of, created from.

What I do not understand is how many activities can operate under this state. For example -- reading a book, having a conversation, driving a car.

As I explained above, awareness is every-thing (apparent/manifest) and no-thing (pure awareness/unmanifest/background). Now, pure awareness/unmanifest is "real", as it is ever present and doesnt change, but "apparent" manifestation (ie. The world) is only "apparently" real (illusion) as it comes and goes and its constantly changes.

To not get too complicated, let's just say the manifest world arises/appears within, its background/substratum which is pure awareness. Like ripples on the ocean, they are not separate, they are one thing (non-dual). This is how activities can be operating at the same time as presence/awareness, because presence is always present, even if your mind is not aware of it.

So, once you "firmly" know you ARE awareness and all doubts of this are removed from the mind, then it doesn't matter if you get engrossed in thought for a time, because you "always" return to your default mode, yourself (presence/awareness).

There is a huge difference between the world of concepts, symbols and images AND the direct living truth of what is - as it is.

When we meditate or watch thoughts or become present, the world of concepts/symbols subsides to reveal the ever-fresh living truth.

In these moments - whether they last minutes or days - we are (often inadvertently) uncovering the natural state of no-separation. In this seamless presence there is a sense of release and relief. There is simply the felt-sense of this… then the next thing…. then this… This state is intensely alive and vivid and uncomplicated.

Once we start to realise that this is the natural state of being it becomes obvious that nothing truly destroys it. When we enter the virtual world of abstraction and rumination this natural state can become overlaid with a mental fog from which we awaken again and again.

But as I indicate, from here we can realise that in all activities there is no actual deviation from the natural state, though there can be from the felt-sense of it.

As to the question of reading etc. Well if attention is utterly absorbed in thought and language and drama there is very little felt-sense of being present in the moment during that period. The same goes for analytic and abstract thinking, rumination, intoxication from alcohol, sleeping, dreaming, anaesthetic and so on. (Personally I wouldn't include driving. I do a lot of driving and can find much of it quite meditative.)

So I would say that if you want to cling on to the pleasant effect of the felt-sense of presence/the natural state, then meditate 24/7, avoid all rumination and deeply analytic thinking, avoid intoxication, sleeping, dreaming, my family… etc.) Sorry, I got a little facetious there, but you get my point.

Or you could lead a fairly normal life in which the felt-sense of the natural state dips when there is intense mental activity - but is quickly restored in moments of balance… like good news remembered. (Because the good news is that there is no deviation from the natural state.)

This is a great question, and one that I have pondered quite a bit too. And, here's the answer I've come up with.

ET is not saying that presence is ALL you need in order to successfully perform a task/activity. I think what he is saying is that, presence gives you the best chance of being able to use your mind effectively, instead of the mind using you (a point he has brought up several times).

When you're conscious, you are able to use the mind ... this is what ET calls "rising above thought, where thought is available as a tool". On the other hand, if you're unconscious, you are not using the mind, it is using you, i.e. involuntary thought.

So, let's take the example of reading a book. Of course, you need the mind to 1 - Read the words, 2- Interpret each word and sentence literally, and 3- Perhaps analyze the material beyond just the literal meaning of the words. And, you can most effectively do this when you're present with your reading activity. The mind is then available for use as a tool, because it is not using you. You can use it. On the other hand, if, while reading the book, you're preoccupied with judgments about your ex-gf/bf, your mind is using you, you're not using the mind, and you won't get any reading done.

One more example to better illustrate the point - Think about how those pilots landed the A320 on the Hudson river. Just presence alone would not have been sufficient. They had to know how the autopilot system worked and that it would automatically adjust the pitch of the plane in the final moments, so it would glide on the water instead of impacting it hard. Because they were (probably) present, they were able to use their minds to figure out the exact actions to take, as opposed to being lost in the unconscious fear of imminent death. It was presence + mind (knowledge of the A320).

Perhaps that's what they mean by "presence of mind" ... presence + mind